risk. you saw this whole group get decimated in its downturn. you saw a great recovery. now we're at a midpoint. >> all right, ben. thank you. steve, always good to see you. we are going out to the downside four days in a row for the dow. that's the first hour of the "closing bell." here's number two. and welcome back to the "closing bell." i'm michelle caruso-cabrera in for maria bartiromo. >> i'm bill griffeth. here's what we're following at the close. here we go again. the dow set to close lower for a fourth straight day despite a rally out of the gates first thing this morning. the s&p 500 is set to snap a four-day losing streak. nope. well, i guess we're up two points right now. no, a fraction. it's going to be a squeaker. we're going to be up all night waiting for the final results. >> let's get straight to today's market action. ben pace joins us along with dan

gender. >> a cast of thousands joining us today. >> guys, what do you think here? ben, we seem to have a problem this week. we really struggled today to hold on to positive territory. why? >> yeah, we really couldn't even hold it at the end. i think the reality of weak third quarter earnings are starting to set in. you had a little bit of a good economic statistic with the jobless claims. this morning that, helped, but it wasn't able to hold. we had a weak summer of statistics so it would be logically the conclusion that we'd have a weak earnings season in the third quarter. then the outlook for 2013 aren't fantastic either. with a market that's come as far as it has, that's what's precipitating the pull back here. >> dan, what's your take on where we're going here these days? >> well, i think, bill, we were definitely overdue for a correction. i mean, the market was up 13% since the end of june. it just got ahead of itself.

the last little push was basically all due to macros. we had news coming out of the ecb regarding the omt program. we saw the new fed program with qe-3. it was really, really fairly light data and so on that was pushing it. the fact we would now pull back is pretty common. we're off about 3% now. frankly probably still have about 4% possibly to go down. a lot of support at about 1370. i think for the most part, we're just kind of stuck in the mud of preelection purgatory until we weed through earnings. >> channing, are you as sanguine as the other guests, or is this the start of something bigger? >> it could be. i think what you have to watch is qe. earnings are going to be very important. the early evidence isn't good. i mean, we've seen a number of high-profile warnings. outside of yum and costco, i

know it's early in the earnings season. earnings are going to be key. i think, you know, from a stimulus perspective, we're kind of out of gas here. we have to see good earnings. if we do see good earnings, i think the market could rally from here. i'm not ready to throw in the towel, but the early warnings signs are that earnings season could be a struggle. >> alan, i hear you're looking for attractively valued assets -- oh, and alan isn't good yet. he's on his way. i can't wait to hear. okay. alan, you there? >> yes, i am. >> it says here -- and we welcome you. it says you're looking for attractively valued assets in an improving macro climate and a strengthening technical environment. where in the world are you finding that right now? >> well, it was easier to find it in u.s. stocks early in the year. the process we use with the allocation strategy funds that i manage is to do those three things. we still think the valuations are quite reasonable. but the thing that i'm worried about now is the macro side,

that second part. the issue that we've had, we know the economic data has been weaker, and i think what most investors are doing is waiting on the sideline to see just what impact that slowing macro data is going to have on corporate earnings in the third quarter. >> you see the slow down coming or continuing right now, and a lot of cash sitting on the sidelines. nobody is doing anything. >> i think that's right. i don't think there's a lot of getting people to step in. the good news for this market and one of the reasons i'm not overly negative is that we're starting to -- we think that valuations are good and that companies have been managing very conservatively. they're also doing a very good job in guiding investor expectations comfortably lower, but, you know, i think what we're finding is that the global slowdown is hurting top line. i'm watching the top line numbers the most. >> okay.

>> so ben, what do you do when there's so much uncertainty going into earnings season? how do you position yourself? >> what we've done is try and respect our price targets. we hit them or came real close to them. we took a little bit of risk off our portfolios, took a little money out of equities. kept the risk neutral and put it into high-yield debt. not a lot of cash. if you do get that correction, that 5 to 7% correction, we'd be looking to put that back into risk assets. we think in general it will be a pretty good 2013 for markets. >> dan, we're all waiting for the jpmorgan earnings tomorrow. what are your expectations? that will be a big number, won't it? >> well, it's going to be very important. it's certainly going to set the trend for where the financials will go. we think we'll see 550 on jpmorgan for the year. we find it very attractive. you have a stock that's very reasonably valued at about a 7 1/2 p.e. it's below market. it has a 3% yield.

they probably might actually take some money out of loan loss reserves, which will also help earnings. frankly, i think that they'll reinitiate a stock buy back and probably take the dividend about 3.5%. it's a buy for us. i think we'll see some good numbers tomorrow. >> what do you think about the financials? >> wells fargo is one of our largest holdings. we think the setup is good. we think wells fargo will do very well. they also don't have a lot of exposure to the capital markets, which have been dreadful. we feel good about wells fargo. the rest of the big money center banks we're a little more cautious on. >> alan, what about you on the financials? we're focusing on so much right now because that is what the markets are waiting for tomorrow, and it could set the tone for a little while here. >> well, clearly our work shows the work as being very inexpensive. they still have a number of head

winds going against them. we're sitting at neutral on financials after being underweight for a good while. i think that the picture is improving. i think that i'd like to see for the macro factors to kind of kick in a little bit more. obviously valuations are very attractive. i think that that's an area that's going to do very well in 2013. >> all right. gentlemen, thank you, all, for your thoughts on the markets today. appreciate it very much. >> thanks. >> so we had a surge in the energy sector, but it was unable to help sustain big early gains. mary thompson joins us with the sector sweep, as we call it. >> hey, there. maybe energy didn't sustain big gains, but the sector did sustain enough to make it the top performing sector of the ones we watch. other risk on sectors leaders, materials, industrials, and financials all trading to the upside. telecom, the worst performing sector despite the big rally in sprint. we are going to have more on that later. first, a closer look at the names driving the sectors today. alpha natural up a whopping 17%.

the coal firm contributing to gains in the energy sector after speculation about higher demand for coal from chinese steel makers. fastenal said third quarter sales are a healthy 13%. sprint bucking the downward trend among telecom stocks on news that japan's bank is looking at taking a majority stake in the company, up 15%. we also want to point out the outperformance of the dow transports over the last seven of eight sessions. today no exception, especially of note given this indices under performance against the dow industrials. a contributor to the dow transports rally recently, federal express, up for the second day in a row on the news of its massive cost-cutting plan. bill, back to you. >> bulls take a little comfort from transports outperforming right now. thank you very much. with the fiscal cliff looming larger every day, the co-chair of the national commission on

fiscal responsibility is sounding a huge warning. >> we have $7.7 trillion worth of economic events that are going to hit america in the gut in december. in washington, they're doing nothing about it. >> it's our block buster exclusive just ahead. >> keep it right here. we have that and a whole lot more heading your way on this special thursday edition of the "closing bell." coming up, ipo no go? why are companies suddenly hesitant to commit to going public? we break down the reasons straight ahead. and foreclosures hit a five-year low, so why aren't some real estate pros celebrating? we get a realty check on why these numbers might not be as bullish for housing as some think. plus -- >> sugar, sugar, i want to make you happy.

>> bear facts. why is a prominent madison avenue ad exec suddenly taking on the products that made him rich? we get answers ahead on the close clez.

then don't miss sleep train's wbest rest event.st ever? you'll find sleep train's very best mattresses at the guaranteed lowest price. plus, pay no interest for 3 years on beautyrest black, stearns & foster, serta icomfort, even tempur-pedic. and rest even better with sleep train's risk-free 100-day money back guarantee. get your best rest ever from sleep train. superior service, best selection, lowest price, guaranteed. ♪ sleep train ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪

wow. did you see this debut? the parent company of realtor century 21 and caldwell banker. surging more than 20% today. which other ipos should we keep an eye on? bob has the details. >> a great day for ipos. all of them ending the day 20% on the upside. particularly interesting, two maul biotech firms did very well. tomorrow, another big one. that's workday. cloud-based computing. they manage employee data for companies. they were founded by dave duffield. they've been in business for eight years. they've never been profitable, but the rev news are increasing very fast. here's the ironic thing. competition, their competition is oracle. oracle is the company that bought people soft almost eight years ago. back to you. >> all right, bob. thank you. now, the flip side of this is we've also seen quite a few

firms pulling their ipos in recent weeks. remember dave & busters, smith electric vehicles, and guitar maker fender. some may view this as a warning sign. david menlow says this is nothing but positive for the ipo market. why the optimism? >> the optimism is that this is an after effect of what happened in the post-facebook era. for five or six weeks there wasn't an ipo that came out, but anything that was going to come out in that time span was automatically going to get hit for 20 or 25% in its valuation. so when you see a deal being pulled, it's not market conditions that everybody puts on there. it's that particular company that is just not standing. >> those that get through the gates can be viewed more positively then. >> yes. it doesn't mean ait's an automatic win formula, but the ones being putted are

outl outliers. >> what do you make of today? >> for pharmaceutical stocks to act the way they did today, it's a little bit of an anomaly. everything else that happened, it seems as though it was right on target. >> does this tell us something about the broader market? when you have confidence to do an ipo, does it mean you should have confidence in the overall market, in the overall economy? >> i think you're beginning to see hints of that. it doesn't mean it's all clear. the reality that we had today, for example, was really just everybody's perception that the real estate market is just going to start getting better and it's an upward swing from there. >> two premier names in the industry there in century 21 and caldwell banker. we were talking during the break, you're watching also so-called secondary ipos, those companies already public that are issuing new shares to the market. those have done very well as well. >> bill, i got it tell you, there has been such a resurgence in the filings of secondaries and pricings. it's on a five to one basis

versus the regular ipos. our business is now almost completely focused on what happens between 4:00 and 5:30 when these deals come out. huge cash available. these deals are working. it's another thing to address michelle's issue. the underwriters have changed from the facebook times where they're pandering to the issuer. now they're worried about the investor. these discounts are getting a heavy -- excuse me, the secondaries are getting heavy discounts. for the most part these deals are working nicely. >> are they diluting the existing shareholders? >> sometimes you will see that, but the vast majority of the deals are refunding the existing debt that they have. we see a lot of real estate deals that are paying down the debt so they can now do into an acquisition mode. >> got it. >> always good to see you, david. >> pleasure. >> thank you for joining us today. under pressure. certainly a lot is riding on tonight's vice presidential debate, especially for the vice president himself, joe biden, in the wake of how the polls have shifted since last week's

performance by the president at his debate. our john harwood sets the scene live from kentucky coming up. p. also ahead -- >> i think the candidates know how serious it is. i think they're trying to avoid it. >> goldman sachs ceo pressing d.c. to get its act together on the fiscal cliff and the nation's debt along with alan simpson and erskine bowles. it's the interview you'll see only on cnbc. it's next, so keep it right here. then, just a little bit later -- ♪ so good, so good, sugar >> it's the video the big soft drink makers do not want you to see ironically made by a former ad executive whose agency represented none other than coca-cola for years. someone here says to watch out because it's not exactly on the up and up. we're going to go to the front lines of the soda wars coming up. stick around. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about low-cost investing. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 at schwab, we're committed to offering you

tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 low-cost investment options-- tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like our exchange traded funds, or etfs tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 which now have the lowest tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 operating expenses tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 in their respective tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 lipper categories. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 lower than spdr tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and even lower than vanguard. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 that means with schwab, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 your portfolio has tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 a better chance to grow. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and you can trade all our etfs online, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 commission-free, from your schwab account. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so let's talk about saving money, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab etfs. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 schwab etfs now have the lowest operating expenses tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 in their respective lipper categories. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 call 1-800-4schwab tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 or visit schwab.com tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 to open an account today. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 funding is easy tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab mobile deposit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 investors should consider tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 carefully information tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 contained in the prospectus, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 including investment objectives, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 risks, charges, and expenses. you can obtain tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 a prospectus by visiting tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 www.schwab.com/schwabetfs. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 please read the prospectus tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 carefully befonvesting. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550

if we want to improve our schools... ...what should we invest in? maybe new buildings? what about updated equipment? they can help, but recent research shows... ...nothing transforms schools like investing in advanced teacher education. let's build a strong foundation. let's invest in our teachers so they can inspire our students. let's solve this. customer erin swenson bought so, i'm happy. today.

sales go up... i'm happy. it went out today... i'm happy. what if she's not home? (together) she won't be happy. use ups! she can get a text alert, reroute... even reschedule her package. it's ups my choice. are you happy? i'm happy. i'm happy. i'm happy. i'm happy. i'm happy. happy. happy. happy. happy. (together) happy. i love logistics. president obama's lackluster debate performance last weeki putting a lot of pressure on vice president joe biden in his showdown tonight with paul ryan. john harwood is in kentucky with the preview. john. >> reporter: michelle, this is going to be a fascinating night between two number twos who might, in the future, be number ones. for right now, they're trying to help their tickets. joe biden, as you mentioned, who arrived in danville. he's now chilling at a

supporter's house with his family before going to the debate tonight, has got a lot on the line because democrats were feeling let down by president obama's performance last week. what joe biden has to do is to buck up those democrats, show he's going to be aggressive in going after the republican ticket, and, you know, he has experience in the venue. he debated sarah palin four years ago, although much different then. that was a comparatively genial event. i would expect him to be quite aggressive. from paul ryan's point of view, he's younger, so less experienced, but he's very fluent and skilled on policy. he came across very well in his republican convention speech. so i'd expect him to hold his own. for both side, dan quail told me the imperative is not to care about the guy who is on the stage with you, but on the top of the other ticket. look for paul ryan to go after president obama. expect joe booiden to say to pa

ryan that your running mate is trying to obscure his positions. it will be an interesting night. >> all right. thank you, john. we'll be watching for sure. catch the debate here on cnbc beginning at 7:00 p.m. eastern time. the best analysis before and after the debate, especially in this election when economic issues are so important. plus, you can vote on cnbc.com on who you thought won the debate. plus, we have our patented feed showing you who is saying what throughout the night. so this is the place to be. >> i don't think we'll have to worry about energy from either one of these candidates tonight. >> oh, no. this is going to be good for sure. meantime, an incredible exclusive look inside the financial industry today from our own steve liesman in his interview with goldman sachs chairman and ceo and the co-chairs of the national commission on fiscal responsibility. they have become brand names in an of themselves. alan simpson and erskine bowles.

wonderful job today. >> oh, thank you. it was an interesting conversation where we talked about the fiscal cliff, resolving the deficit, and got inside goldman's business a bit. a lot of it was concerned with the warnings. >> if we do nothing, next year you'll have the rate of growth slow to somewhere like 3 to 5%. you'll have unemployment go up another 2% to around above 9%, and 2 million more people will lose their jobs. and we're doing nothing about it. >> it's very serious. i think the candidates know how serious it is. i think they're trying to avoid it, maybe in part because it is so consequential and serious. maybe the ideas that would have to be put forward will be unattractive to some people. obviously we're in a position where new discipline is going to have to be imposed. people are going to be disappointed in the consequence. >> they worship the god of re-election. they're figuring that out and how to duck every hot issue before november 6th.

then erskine says the whirlpool of $7 trillion is going to hit us like a rainstorm. >> people are never going to understand how critical this particular time in history is. we have $7.7 trillion worth of economic events that are going hit america in the gut in december. and in washington, they're doing nothing about it. nothing about it. we should be asking these guys running for president and every guy running for congress, what are you going to do? >> i think the fed is being very aggressive, and i think courageous in doing what they can. there's very little monetary tools left, but you know, they have a mandate, and they're deploying all this they have. there's nothing that will allow the fed to compensate for a total abdication by the people of fiscal responsibility. >> so i think my colleague rick santelli, who's coming up, might have few things to say. i want to emphasize one point that i thought was fascinating.

fein's comments on the upside of solving this debt problem. we're always talking about the cost, but all three of them actually talked about what they're calling an announcement effect. what would the market do? how would it unleash business if the congress and other players in washington could come to an agreement on the fiscal cliff problem? i think we think too much about the negative. fein today emphasizing the positive and the characteristics of the united states' economy that could be unleashed if we solve the problem. >> that's because we work in cable tv, steve. let's bring in the aforementioned rick santelli. rick, your initial thoughts. i have to say my favorite sound bite was alan simpson referring to politicians worshipping the good of re-election. that's one of the core issues here, right? we just can't get a deal done. >> i agreed with 99% of everything. as a matter of fact, i think i have about 20 santelli exchanges that represented almost every one of those clips.

i agree with all of it. the only thing that i had a reservation with is i think that when lloyd blankfein talked about courageous and aggressive, it depends on which side of the receiving end of the liquidity you are. the goldmans, the primary dealers, the large banks, they're on the receiving end. other than that, i agree with everything. politicians are there to serve, but, no, they're there to get re-elected. the two gentlemen sitting there that were once politicians don't have to worry about re-election. there's a degree of honesty there that i found refreshing. >> yeah, you would -- look, it's nice to have conviction and passion about your points of view. we certainly get that from both sides of the aisle right now. to some degree, that's why we don't get a solution to these important problems. steve, where is the civility that once existed in washington and the spirit of compromise we heard in the 1980s, for example? we keep hearing about the

relationship between ronald reagan and tip o'neill and their willingness to compromise, even though they were about as far apart politically as you could get. >> bill, i agree with what you said and what rick said about that. i think it's wrong to say they're honest and they're the way they are because they're not in office anymore. i think what's more correct is they both come from an era where you fought, and you fought hard. but once the vote was taken, you know, they were kind of done. it wasn't really a scorched-earth policy. i grew up in a household where there were many politicians held in high esteem. they were guys like jacob javitz who were held in high esteem. >> reread "alexander hamilton." there's never been civility in politics. >> that comes and goes. that's a cyclical situation. we had a civil war. that was the most contentious

period in the history of our country. >> that doesn't make it right. >> i'd like to bring up one additional point. two other things were brought up that we haven't really talked about. one was, and i don't know who said it, it's about leadership. you know, i keep envisioning the nerk y dugout. you have all these personalities. they're going in different directions. it takes the right manager to get the players to do the right thing. i really think that president obama has his good traits and bad traits. in my opinion, his bad trait is he isn't a leader that can bring these sides together in a compromise. the second point about fairness and tax, i think it was mr. bowles who said -- no, it was lloyd. he said, i'd pay more taxes, but they'd have to show they'd treat my extra money in a responsible fashion. amen to that. >> what do you think about the idea that if president obama got elected it would be easier to get a deal done because he would

no longer worship the god of re-election? >> i think one thing that's missed by everybody is no matter who's elected, the math is the same. i think it's starting to don on romney there's no free lunch tax cuts. for obama, there's no free lunch from raising taxes either. they're both going to face, i think, very similar realities. as i like to say, the math is inexrabble. >> it isn't the same. the math isn't the same. i believe that if you do the right thing, you broaden the tax base, you take away the loopholes, i think that there is a nonstatic aspect. there's economic growth that can make up a difference, which is at the epicenter of that 5 trillion number. >> not just that, they both have very different attitudes about spending. >> but guys -- >> which they've highlighted. >> i think we're at a point now

where we've figured out tax cuts don't pay for themselves. >> i disagree. tax cuts that last one year where you don't know what the next two, three, or four years is going to be. if we had a tax going on for a long time, i think it would be a big time boost to the economy. >> very, very quickly, guys. look, they've only got 30 days after the election. i know the negotiations have already started. what would a compromise look like that would please the markets right now? i know we're not going to please everybody, but what's it going to take -- you know, you were talking, steve, about the headline coming out that would please the market. what would that look like? >> it would look like something where if you had a democrat and republican on television at the same time, had a sufficient close-up. there would be equal numbers of beads of sweat on both of their brows as they went to support the rule. >> i see. okay. that's going to happen. thank you, both. always good to talk to you guys. see you later.

great job again, steve. so foreclosures have hit a five-year low, but don't let that top line statistic fool you. the foreclosure picture may actually darken next year, we are told. our housing guru explains why coming up. then later, billionaire mark cuban chimes in on a story we told you about yesterday. find out if he thinks it's a good idea for ceos to threaten their employees with losing their jobs if president obama wins. plus -- ♪ sugar, so good, so good >> as entertaining as well-intentioned as this video may be, someone here is actually hurting the movement to limit sugar consumption. we're going debate the merits of this viral video in the back half of the program. do not miss it coming up.

more news moving the needle for housing in a positive direction. foreclosure filings falling to a five-year low. diana has the details. >> bill, it is good news, but it's also a warning to investors

buying foreclosed properties. it may be time to shift markets for the best deals. foreclosures are dropping dramatically in some states but rising in others. take a look, if you will. foreclosure filings in q-3 are way down in california, arizona, michigan, and georgia. these are states where foreclosures don't need to go before a judge, so they've been moving quickly. investors have been inhaling the property, pushing prices higher. buying into this, not the best way to profit. on the flip side, you're going to get better deals and bigger profit now in states that are seeing foreclosure spikes, states where you need the judge and where houge backlogs are finally moving. new york, new jersey, florida, and illinois seeing double and triple digit jumps in foreclosure activity. investor demand has driven supplies on the low end out west down dramatically. zillo reporting today that the

cheapest california homes down 43%. that's squeezing those much-needed first-time home buyers out of the market. michelle. >> all right. thank you so much. based on all those numbers, are things looking up in the housing market? >> two guests on that. sherry is a real estate attorney. she thinks the house market will still bump along for some time to come. sherry, why? >> well, if you look at the 50,000 foot view, you take a step back. we have states like california where, sure, foreclosures are down 45%, but they're still one of the top states for foreclosure. if my kid brought home a zero on her math test and brought it up 45%, she's still failing. in most of the judicial states, the foreclosures are actually up. here in florida, foreclosures are up by 24% 11 months in a

row. we're seeing similar problems with the price trends. prices are bumping along the bottom, which can be worse in the long run than sharp drops. historically, we're still really far away from where the price trends should be. >> fran, you see it the other way, don't you? why? >> i do. i think that the third and fourth quarter last year was obviously a standstill. we saw a lot of little movement happening. then what we saw is that the u.s. economy overall was actually not really doing so well in the stock market, unless you're in apple. at the end of the day, we saw people not really sure what was going to happen in terms of whether they were going to get a pay increase on wall street, if they were going to get paid at all. what we saw in the first and second quarter of this year was a huge shift. we saw people seeing pent up demand because they want toddy verse if i their portfolio. they wanted to see their money work for them, and the stock market was not yielding more than 3% on average. what we wanted to see, and what most people were hoping for, was to see some money make their

money work for them. what we ended up seeing was people diversifying and buying property in the first and second quarter absolutely taking advantage of the first -- the past two years, property had come down somewhat. what we saw -- >> sherry, do you see people getting pushed into the market because of low interest rates? that was bernanke's intention. >> no -- >> i absolutely -- >> sherry. >> the first and second quarter of this year we saw a lack of supply, pent-up demand, and people actually -- >> didn't i say sherry? >> but that's from investors. there are two factors that are going to impact whether average americans -- again, average americans have very little money invested in the stock market. average americans are going to buy if they're not afraid of negative equity, and we still have 25% of those folks with a mortgage under water. we still have huge unemployment numbers. even more importantly, what's not reflected in those numbers is underemployment. >> ladies, we've got to go. thank you. you're welcome to talk to each

other during the break. see you later. thank you. >> they talk real estate and a hockey game broke out. let's get to jackie deangelis with a market flash. >> amd lower in after hours after it closed at a 3 1/2 year low announcing that revenue for the third quarter is going to be down sequentially 10%. that was more than the previous guidance. weaker than expected demand, they're saying, across all product lines caused by the challenging macro environment. we've definitely heard that before. the gross margin, 31% now less than the previous expectation of 44%. this stock down more than 7%, under $3. >> wow. amd. >> yikes. i think those it ladies are still arguing right now. >> i think so. phone home? not so fast. the fbi could make some arrests related to jpmorgan's $6 billion trading loss over the coming months, and taped conversation could be the smoking gun. plus, sharp reaction to a story we did on the show

yesterday. billionaire mark cuban tweeted about the ceo threatening to fire his employees if the president wins re-election. wait until you hear what he's saying. also -- ♪ sugar, because >> don't be won over by cute. someone here says the claims made in this viral video do not serve the movement to curtail sugary drink consumption. we'll also speak to the head of the organization behind this video. both sides of that. do you think they have the ingredients for a sticky debate? just like a real estate debate. i love it. coming up. when you take a clos. ...at the best schools in the world... ...you see they all have something very interesting in common. they have teachers... ...with a deeper knowledge of their subjects. as a result, their students achieve at a higher level. let's develop more stars in education. let's invest in our teachers... ...so they can inspire our students.

let's solve this.

outspoken billionaire and nba team owner mark cuban slamming a ceo's letter to employees saying their jobs are in jeopardy if president obama wins re-election. robert frank has the latest on the news today. robert. >> thanks, michelle. david siegel's e-mail touched off an online fire storm after we first reported it yesterday morning. this was the e-mail in which the westgate resort ceo told his employees if obama is elected i might have to lay off all my workers or shut down the company and fire all 7,000 of them. yesterday, david siegel told us he wasn't threatening his workers, just educating them. mark cuban isn't buying it. he said he thinks siegel's e-mail shows perhaps poor judgment. telling or forcefully suggesting

how your employees should vote is the exact way to create problems among your workers and reduce productivity, he tweeted. i received calls from many westgate employees yesterday. their reaction was a little more mixed. some said they agreed with siegel and were proud of the comments. others say he did the same thing in the 2008 election and that siegel was again strongly suggesting that workers, quote, vote for his party. look, it's his company. he can do what he wants. while this may not be the textbook management strategy, siegel has never been shy about what he believes. back to you, michelle. >> well, that was demonstrated by him coming on tv to say he wanted to talk exactly about all of that. thanks, robert. >> elsewhere, four former jpmorgan executives -- hello, there. these exec tifftives are learning the hard way that you never know who is listening to or recording your phone conversations at work. kate kelly has the troubling details for us. >> bill, thanks. a slew of regulators and prosecutors have taken an interest in the engineers behind the so-called london whale case,

which, of course, lost jpm nearly $6 billion. the sec, the occ, various state attorneys general and the u.s. attorney are all parties who are asking some pretty pointed questions about current and former employees, what they did, what they knew about these losing trades. the four london-based people most closely involved have all left the firm in recent months. the big question surrounding them right now, did they intentionally mismark their credit derivative positions to make them look better? "the new york times" reports today that the four will be interviewed soon by the fbi, including the most senior guy who will be interviewed in greece. making a criminal case, however, could be tough. bad intentions can often be hard to prove, and then there's the issue of nationalalty. two of the former traders are french. one is believed to be a greek citizen, the other spanish. whether the traders can be extradited from europe and their various countries of citizenship remains unclear. back to you, guys. we don't know how this is going to unfold. >> they had recordings of phone

calls still on file. >> absolutely. you know what this proves, kate? every financial crisis story returns to greece. >> it does. >> is there going to be a greek yogurt scandal sometime soon? one quick interesting thing is that jpmorgan has reviewed these materials. they did say something telling on july 13th. we'll see what they say tomorrow in earnings. at the time say said we don't have confidence in the integrity of these marks. that certainly left over the question there was intentional fraud here. it's a long way to see what the regulators do. >> thanks, kate. >> thank you. >> good stuff. so another offensive in the battle against sugary drinks. is this viral video actually stretching the truth to make its point? the head of the organization behind the video defends it on the other side of the break. plus, nothing like a good dose of drama in the markets. the dow finished down all five days this week. tomorrow's the last chance to have an up day. three of wall street's top money pros preview the action. we're back in a flash.

[ male announcer ] this is joe woods' first day of work. and his new boss told him two things -- cook what you love, and save your money. joe doesn't know it yet, but he'll work his way up from busser to waiter to chef before opening a restaurant specializing in fish and game from the great northwest. he'll start investing early, he'll find some good people to help guide him, and he'll set money aside from his first day of work to his last, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade.

welcome back. it's those lovable coca-cola polar bears like you've never

seen them before, but coke is not exactly happy about it. the new video puts them center stage in the war on sugary drinks. this video, by the way, is from the center for science in the public interest. the group is against soda consumption and after you watch fact may be more obvious. watch. ♪ sugar sugar i want to make you happy ♪ ♪ like the sun shine you brighten up a great day ♪ ♪ sugar sugar so good so good ♪ ♪ sugar ♪ sugar sugar you really make me happy ♪ ♪ i get to feeling high i want to shout it from the mountainside ♪ ♪ sugar >> as the video goes viral, the

national center of public policy research calls it misleading saying it actually undermines the real health debate. jeff joins us now along with the executive director behind the video. jeff, i'm going to start with you. you say this ad is overstating the facts. and by the way, coca-cola is saying it's distorting the facts. >> well, it's a catchy tune, and polar bears, you've got to love them. let's consider this for a second. chain saws, cutting off polar bears' legs, that's the consequence of drinking some soda? i think michael jacobson and i agree, you shouldn't drink excessive amounts of soda, he probably thinks almost all soda consumption is too much. and i think, you know what? occasionally people should be able to enjoy soda. obesity's a real problem, but not an occasional soda. >> i mean, it is a satire, so it's going to overstate the facts to try and make its point. but michael, did you overdo it? >> i don't think so. i agree with mr. stire, having

soda occasionally in small portions is reasonable, but all too many people, tens of millions of people are consuming soda every day in huge containers. a 32-ounce cup, 64 ounces at a kfc or a 7-eleven. having it occasionally is fine, but the way we're consuming it, it's causing obesity and obesity is contributing to diabetes, heart disease, strokes, erectile dysfunction -- >> is this the proper vehicle to make that point? you know, you're going to have people who are going to make fun of the issue and the perception's going to be that the people who are against sugary drinks are not really buckling down making a serious point on this issue. >> i think people understand the video. it's pretty clear. don't drink too much soda. . that's very clear. what we're going up against, coca-cola, forget pepsi and the others, just coca-cola spends

about $2 billion a year, $2 billion marketing sugary drinks in the united states. >> michael, what do you say to all that? and at what point -- jeff, what do you say to all that? and at what point does the individual have to take responsibility? >> i agree with that 100%. and i'm all for it, but that will be a welcome change from michael jacobson's group which has long been pushing things like soda taxes. i would imagine they or groups like them support the ban on large sodas. this is part of a larger campaign that overfocuses, hyper focuses on soda. we all know people overweight that probably drink no full sugary soda. it's not about the soda. this is misguiding people to think, oh, we just need to worry about soda. we ought to be having a conversation about total calorie consumption, total exercise. and it's become a joke already. mayor bloomberg, the polar

bears. let's talk about the real issues. >> where do you think personal responsibility comes in on it? should we ban desserts? should we ban -- >> no. >> and it's 2,000 calories for a plate of food, no, can't be more than 1,000. where does it stop? >> we're not talking about banning soda. we're saying let's consume it in small portions occasionally. >> well -- >> and the industry, consumers should make up their own minds, they will. go to the realbears.org, read some facts, don't be affected by the $2 billion a year that just coke spends pushing sugary drinks. mr. steir telling coca-cola to get its whole body off the scale. >> coke's not the only company that makes a sugary drink right now. >> well, that's the next video. >> that makes me think, michael, you're feeling guilty from the years you spent working for the ad agencies and coca-cola, did

you? >> i never worked for coca-cola. >> he's also worked for al gore. let's not focus about the ad. maybe we could agree that we need to focus on calories and forget about making a joke about soda, it's enough already. >> let's remember that soft drinks are the one food or beverage, the only one that has been shown in scientific studies to promote weight gain and obesity. that is why we -- >> see, that's the problem -- >> -- and the center for disease control and mayor bloomberg and other advocates focus on soda. i urge people to go to the realbears.org and make up your own minds. >> jeff, final word. >> i'm all for that approach, but michael jacobs has long been pushing soda taxes and the food police are not in favor of choice. if this is a new move in the direction of personal responsibility, welcome. >> all right, gentlemen, thank you both. >> thank you. >> contentious issue these days, especially here in new york. >> yes, so, what does this navy ship, and the african country of

gana have in common? >> wait until you hear this story coming up. ♪

[ male announcer ] how do you make 70,000 trades a second... ♪ reach one customer at a time? ♪ or help doctors turn billions of bytes of shared information... ♪ into a fifth anniversary of remission? ♪ whatever your business challenge, dell has the technology and services to help you solve it.

whatever your business challenge, mike rowe here at a ford tell me fiona, who's having a big tire event? your ford dealer. who has 11 major brands to choose from? your ford dealer. who's offering a rebate? your ford dealer. who has the low price tire guarantee... affording peace of mind to anyone who might be in the market for a new set of tires? your ford dealer. i'm beginning to sense a pattern. buy four select tires, get a $60 rebate. use the ford service credit credit card, get $60 more. that's up to $120. where did you get that sweater vest? your ford dealer. a secretive hedge fund billionaire, and the african country of ghana, what do they have in common?

a fight over money. >> of course. >> a court in ghana ruling this navy ship cannot leave port. run by secretive hedge fund billionaire paul singer to take control of the ship because they owe $1.6 billion. when the country defaulted back in 2001, argentina has repeatedly repudiated those. >> i see a clint eastwood movie coming after this. >> they've tried to seize the presidential plane in the past and they were forced to cancel trips because of it. >> before we go, one last look at wall street before we get to "fast money." >> it's also very smart. >> it's smart money, trading fast today. the dow down 3.5% intd of time over the week, if we close lower tomorrow, it'd be the first time since middle of may. >> may 14 to may 18th. >> five days in a row for the dow to c